Irresponsible Advice
If you are a regular reader here, or even if you aren’t, I want to preface this by saying that I am not trying to attack any one company or any one person. Rather, an opportunity has presented itself to demonstrate the kinds of irresponsible advice that are openly floating about in the world of social media when it comes to marketing your business.
In this particular case, the article comes from HubSpot, a highly respected company, a company I respect a great deal. But that respect and credibility is *exactly* why I find this content so disturbing. We’ve come to expect better from them.
Let’s take this article a little bit at a time and talk about why I think this represents irresponsible advice.
So this post’s title is “Blogging Trumps Traditional Advertising in ROI Head-to-Head Case Study.” The post, near the beginning, sets the stage for what this HubSpot customer did with their super bowl ads:
The ads used a tracking phone number — which means the business knew which incoming calls were a result of the commercial — and encouraged viewers to visit the company’s homepage; other than that, there was nothing in the ad campaign integrating the offline efforts with their website or another online presence like social media.
One thing I have always said about super bowl commercials – they might be clever, they might be super funny, but quite often you don’t even know what the ad was for. They are more entertainment than anything else. The fact that this advertiser used a special phone number to track leads is interesting, but given that that was the main way to track leads, one would also assume that TV watchers were encouraged to respond via telephone. In that scenario, hyping the website or the social media presence of the company would have reduced the number of leads. Right?
Let’s move on.
The article shows a graph indicating that during the period that the ads were running…
along with several inbound leads, the customer’s blog generated twice as much traffic as its TV spots. To make matters worse, the ads resulted in no online leads, only 7 phone calls, and zero opportunities or customer conversions. Needless to say, the company was not very satisfied with the ROI of the Super Bowl ad campaign.
Now, let’s think about this really carefully.
First, the customer’s blog out-performed the TV ads. Is it possible that the TV ads generated interest, people didn’t want to call the trackable phone number, but they Googled the company and the blog site came up? It’s possible, right?
Second, we must again note that the primary call-to-action, it seems, was for people to call a special telephone number that was featured in the ad. Given that, the goal would not have been to drive website traffic, which would not have been trackable to the television ad campaign.
Third, OK, yes, 7 phone calls out of a reported 2.8 million person audience is not a great percentage. We can agree on that one. Then again, Super Bowl Sunday is still a Sunday. Do people really want to take time out of watching the big game to call about a product? Given that context, 7 calls may not be all that discouraging after all.
So, HubSpot company is not super duper pleased with the ROI of its super bowl campaign. OK. Fair enough.
Now here’s the part that really fried my friddle (and you can quote me on that).
This customer has (understandably) requested to remain anonymous, but they asked us to share this story with the marketing community as a reminder that, more often than not, outbound marketing just isn’t worth the cost. This customer has seen a much higher return at a fraction of the cost doing inbound marketing with HubSpot software.
First, let’s get one thing out of the way pronto-pup. Saying something like “more often than not” based on one case study is simply irresponsible. In fact, it’s rather laughable. What if medical scientists said that they had cured cancer based on results in one lab rat? We’d be kind of appalled, right? We should be similarly raising our eyebrows in this scenario. We don’t know what kind of company this customer is. We don’t know what else they are doing to market their products. In fact, we don’t even know what their products are. We know that they had $54,000 to spend on super bowl ads in a targeted area. One would assume they are a B2C company based on the campaign. Do we really want to offer comprehensive advice based on all of this stuff we don’t know? Well, I don’t.
Now, there’s another little red herring in here too. If you noticed a few paragraphs up, the article noted that there were no online leads. Now, I get a little hazy here, but if there were ZERO online leads, that means all of that website traffic and all of that blog traffic didn’t result in any leads either, right? So even if the inbound marketing seemed to out-perform the super bowl ads traffic-wise, no leads still equals no leads.
Also somewhat absent from this equation is how much that HubSpot software costs. The products page does not seem to list pricing. I’m guessing it isn’t free.
Let’s end by looking at this paragraph:
Marketers, if you focus on inbound marketing, you will see consistent results. It takes time, dedication, and hard work to create great content and generate inbound leads. But those who are willing to do the work (including the company referenced in this post) get to see a real return on investment. In fact, since this company started using inbound marketing with HubSpot, it’s increased its organic traffic by 567% and its overall traffic by 583% in less than a year.
The problem with this statement, of course, is that this does not prove the ROI of the HubSpot software or of inbound marketing. Increasing traffic is great, but if your sales numbers aren’t climbing (and these figures are noticeably absent from the article) you’re still in a hole, right?
To me, the article was surprisingly misleading, possibly at the peril of a lot of companies who will be swayed by the words of such a reputable and respected company. The only point that I would agree with whole-heartedly is that neither outbound or inbound marketing should work in a vacuum. Integrating tactics is the most effective way to ensure positive results.
You can read the full article here. I’d like to see if your take differs from mine. If so, why?
1st image credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/aguichard/357212691/ via Creative Commons
2nd image credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ehousley/2657942647/ via Creative Commons
36 Comments
Leave a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
I am not impressed with the “case study” as it has numerous holes many of which you addressed here. I’d like to know more about the product/service they were offering. I want to know what the particular ad unit looked like. Show me the commercial. I want to know more about who took the calls that came in and what they did when they received them.
It is hard for me to accept their conclusions as being fair, balanced and honest.
@TheJackB Thanks Jack. The whole “study” part seems rather thin, non?
@margieclayman Very thin. It leaves me with a million questions about what is going on there. Based upon one experience I won’t say that someone is intentionally being shady but it makes me wonder about their products/expertise.
Wait, a company tried to get people to grab their phones (or pen and paper to jot down the number), and CALL in to learn about a product based on a 30 SECOND spot… in the middle of the SUPERBOWL? Bwahahahaha!
@CarolSchiller There’s that too 🙂
Margie. I came over to fill you in on my antics and total SNAFU on Twitter last night, as well as thank you for your presence in my life that reminded me of who and how I want to “be” when I am all done trying to “grow up” ! LOL.
…Then, I read this. This bothers me, a lot. I hope @TheJackB will continue his investigation and share more with us (me) about what really is going on. After almost a year together, you will probably recall me saying over and over, how much I adore HubSpot and will be eternally grateful for finding them when I did.
Disturbing. Yes. I jokingly commented to one of the techs at HubSpot on the phone a week ago, that they must be getting too big for their own britches. When I joined them, a little over a year ago, they really put the “service” in Customer Service. It didn’t matter who you spoke to, by email or on the phone, you felt as if you were talking with a friend that really wanted to help AND had the skills to do it…whatever it was, whomever you happened to be speaking with.
Now? MMM, IF your support ticket doesn’t get lost in the cracks, you MIGHT have your issue resolved. Within a week or two. Certainly, not that day.
I’m not wise or very smart and no one could ever mistake me for tech-savy (thus my issue on Twitter last night!)… but they sure have exploded into HUGE right in front of our eyes… maybe the quality isn’t quite able to keep up with the quantity? I dunno. But I am very disappointed and more than just a bit disillusioned.
@girlygrizzly @TheJackB I shared this post and the one that HubSpot wrote with someone who was only slightly familiar with them. The response was, “Well, this is an ad right?” I said, “No, this was framed as a blog post, and HubSpot has worked very hard to present themselves as a credible educational resource.”
I think that’s what really bothers me. They are presenting information to entice people to click on their products page, but the information is faulty at best, misleading at worst. It’s disappointing indeed.
@margieclayman @TheJackB Well. Indeed. I guess the word is fate. Fate seems to be taking a hold of me in the direction it wants me to head. Thanks Margie for sharing what is important. And ya know, as crazy as ye may be… you still do me good.
It’s kinda funny that in the wild, most people think that you should be grateful when they send a lot of traffic to your website regardless of whether or not the traffic converts. If the traffic does not convert, it is an expense and is a negative ROI.
Asking people to dial a phone number on a SuperBowl Sunday from a 30 second commercial is like offering free ice cream to all elephants who visit your shop on Tuesday. Stupid, silly and designed to fail. Whatever agency that advised this company that that was a serious measurement should be fired.
@dogwalkblog Well, it depends. One could argue that the 7 people who did take time out to call were highly qualified leads, right? So then why weren’t they properly nurtured into paying customers? Moreover, why isn’t that web traffic translating into sales? Seems like something might be missing in the lead nurturing or sales process. Or maybe the product (whatever it is) is kind of crappy. Hard to tell. And that’s the biggest problem of all.
@margieclayman Highly qualified or just plain drunk and called the number to see if anyone would actually answer 🙂 But you’re right, to draw that kind of conclusion from the limited activity seems like overreach to prove a conclusion they already drew rather than letting the data tell the story.
This is so funny it almost hurts. Just two weeks ago I was talking about this topic of traffic with douglas karr and we both were stating how it is not about driving LOTS of traffic to your website or blog, it is about driving the RIGHT KIND of traffic to your website or blog.
This is how and where so many folks get “fooled” by these so called high content sites and programs producing case studies and white papers out the wahhzoo. Nothing is going to produce results in ONE campaign. It takes more time for people to trust and generate any type of traction. Just because folks are online does not change their behaviors from a buy or trust perspective. They still hesitate until their feel sure or they see you over a period of time and can watch your actions.
One of the reasons that working with bloggers or other people online who already have an established community. They already possess the trust companies so desperately want with consumers. Then again we have seen how PR agencies have blown those opportunities too (blogger outreach).
In a world of empowered consumers, how about the novel idea of offering value, credibility and doing what you say you will do. Try that for a new york minute then tell me your results in 6 months. #justsayin
@prosperitygal Yeah. That. The whole concept of super bowl ads is really kind of silly. you have a total of 3 minutes of time over the course of 4 hours to make a really big impact on someone. Is it going to totally turn things around for your business, especially if that is ALL you are doing? Hmmmmmmm. Tough nut to crack. Not.
What the post fails to address is the customer’s goal for advertising in the first place. They compare leads from the blog and leads from the commercial, but maybe their goal from the commercial was to establish a presence in a new local market. Maybe they didn’t expect to generate leads. And even if they did, you could say that they got bad advice when they were told to do that via a superbowl ad. That doesn’t necessarily mean that blogging always trumps advertising for ROI – it depends on why you’re doing it. It’s like saying, “Screwdrivers More Effective Than Potato Peelers”. At what? It’s a little ironic that the post doesn’t talk about the goals because having clear goals is the first step of any online marketing (inbound – whatever) program.
@LauraOrban Exactly. Great point, Laura. Another huge aspect of the scenario that was left out. Maybe the company just wanted to get more brand recognition. Maybe they wanted to see how a new locale would react to them. Obviously they weren’t happy with the results, but we don’t really know what they were shooting for.
Ok, so some marketing company/person did something that failed. As you point out, there’s no revelation to be drawn from any such instance.
And as everyone here knows, the Super Bowl is one of the most unique advertising environments possible.
But here’s why I’m surprised by this post… if you don’t realize HubSpot is always dishing out insane amounts of hyperbole and exaggeration exactly like this, then you don’t understand HubSpot at all. The quality of their content is all exactly the same as this. They are masters of hype, real masters.
Thinking of HubSpot as some type of authority is insane, because they aren’t. They are merely popular, which is completely unrelated. Britney Spears is popular, but she sure isn’t an authority on music.
HubSpot is the bubble gum of marketing, for newbies who don’t know any better. Warn your friends.
@SecondGlance Well, I have only experienced content from them that seemed good – their webinars and white papers have often seemed respectable. Of course one expects them to try to sell something, but they seem capable of offering really pretty good advice. This was such blatantly irresponsible and incomplete advice that it specifically attracted my attention. I’ll take your word for it though 🙂
Traffic doesn’t mean jack. I got more leads when my traffic was lower and the same with many blogs I know.
You are right Margie, the real numbers are the sales and income, traffic is like a shop saying foot traffic has increased, but if they are all window shoppers then what?
I think Hubspot in this case is obviously pushing their product, but is doing it in obviously biased approach. The research is poor, as for discrediting TV ads? Really?
I would love them to go up to a large business and tell them to pull their ad budget and invest it online. When was the last time a big brand decided to cancel it’s above the line campaign and go only online?
Never, because let’s face it, traditional advertising still has the shock and awe power.
I just would like to see Hubspot spread that kind of dribble in front of the marketing manager of a large brand.
@John Falchetto Sadly, I think a lot of marketing managers would believe this post. There is a graph, lots of numbers – which makes it look very respectable. If you are new to marketing or new to business or are just willing to listen to other people, this could very easily lead you down a wrong path. A damaging path. And that’s a real shame.
This left me speechless – as a marketer, one who works mostly with people looking to grow their offline biz online, HubSpot has become a thorn in my side – I can’t help but feel that they deliberately scare the hell out of people, offer a solution that is designed to fail – remember, a service package is EXTRA so why would they make it comprehensive? They focus on stuff that means NOTHING. I have 2 sites – one that gets AWESOME traffic and makes NOTHING and another with what some would say is terrible traffic and that is my bread and butter – and well, now it’s got some sweet jam mixed in. I feel so so bad for the companies that get duped, misled, have their confidence ruined all because they fell for awesome marketing …. BTW – JFF go check out the HS portfolio – more than 50% of the sites are no longer on their platform.
@Ameena Falchetto
Wow! Your comment is shocking to me! I used HubSpot at a few different companies that I have worked for. In fact, I have typically been the one bringing the software in and selling the team on its value. It is just a tool. It does not solve miracles and SEO is just one tiny piece of a multi-channel strategy. I am a big believer in inbound marketing but I am not so left justified that I dont see the value in other forms of marketing. Thinking back, they do make it a point to call out anything that ‘fails’ outside of what they do and preach. Not sure this is a good strategy for anyone to take…
@C_Pappas What’s shocking? … I don’t feel it’s necessary for the people I have met and work with – but then I work with small businesses not big ones.
Yes, it is a tool – and tools are meant to help.
@Ameena Falchetto
Shocking to hear you say that about HubSpot. I have never thought anything but great things about them. I have worked primarily at smaller companies (less than 100 employees) and love the integration with Salesforce and ability to see the movement of a lead from entry to the system to it’s status in the pipeline. Havent come across other tools that can do this..
@C_Pappas Ok, my clients are solo or 2-3 employees … different needs and different set ups …. I can possibly see how HS can help larger businesses of 25+ employees but not convinced on the value of hitting small ones.
@Ameena Falchetto Sorry to hear that your experiences with Hubspot have been so negative. Seems a lot of people here have experienced the same thing. I have never used their tools but have perused their webinars and white papers before and everything seemed pretty respectable. Maybe Amber-Lee is right – maybe they got too big for their britches. That would be a real shame.
Nevermind the claim here that HS is making, I am appalled by how salesy this post is! Xyzzz didnt work, but if they used HS then they would have better results. I saw in the comments below that someone asked what this was framed as and is surprising that this is a blog post. I cannot keep up with all their content to save my life and honestly have never seen them take this approach before. Just baffles me to say the least. As a company that talks so much about inbound marketing (which is the concept of helping, not selling), this is really an outbound push to use their blog to advertise to their products/services to their readers who may not be going any deeper than the blog content. Not liking this so much…
@C_Pappas Yeah, I mean, if you are talking about how to use a blog for inbound marketing, you have to expect that they would promote their products. That’s cool and I don’t have a problem with that per se. However, I would have liked to see this more as a problem solving mission rather than a “everything other than inbound marketing stinks” sort of thing. I think they could have noted that maybe the super bowl ads weren’t targeted enough whereas with inbound marketing you can often target your audience with precision. Maybe they could have talked more about whether further integration would have made the ads more successful – they touched on it but only in passing. Misinformation is different from being “selly.” Purposefully misguiding people so that they want to buy your product is not the same as touting your own product. Like I said, I feel like Hubspot should know better.
Oh, this reminds me of the expert bloggers who are now running around telling everyone that having an actual marketing/blogging schedule is unnecessary based on “the experience of my friend.” And then when I challenged that idea on Twitter, they deleted the conversation because it ‘wasn’t going anywhere” (y’know that place where reality trumps narcissism is now “nowhere”) It’s reached a point where brands and people-as-brands are believing/promoting that their own personal experience and perception is fact. Dangerous territory Blog readers beware…
@susangiurleo Nice. I guess transparency is becoming untrendy, eh? 🙂
@margieclayman I think it’s less transparency and more honesty that is endangered here. I’m seeing lots of folks I used to trust now moving toward selling “the dream” rather than reality. Sure, I can build a huge email list, too, if I tell people they don’t have to work or have any discipline. But that would be kinda lying. And then when someone calls me on it, I’d have to erase their Tweets and stuff….Personally, I may speak the truth and not be the most popular kid in school, but I can sleep at night and show my face in public.
Silver Bullets and Factpinions.
If someone asked me to share their story as a case study, I would do the same just as Hubspot did. Put the numbers on the table and allow others to evaluate and find the gems that apply to their business.
It is tough to compare the Superbowl TV Ad vs.a blog. These are apples and oranges since each have a different purpose and the call to action would most likely be different. The measures of success for either marketing campaign will be overlapping but with one audience “searching” and the other watching as a stranger, there is no comparison.
In either case, there is no silver bullet. Creating a synergy between several marketing methods increases the results for each. One stand alone marketing tactic will not have theh strength of several working in tandem.
Factpinions:
From a reader’s perspective, the blog is not typically fact. In most cases, the blog is filled with factpinions. Factpinions are when the facts are blended with opinions to make a point. If readers can read the blog as factpinions and remember to “trust but verify” in all things, Andrew Pitre makes his point. Don’t make assumptions and look twice before you leap.
Andrew does it an a more a aggressive manner than you will typically see from the Hubspot team. He does generalize the results and the conclusions assume you know are following his thought process. A lawyer would certainly tear the conclusions apart by asking about how the data was broken down.
…. but Andrew makes his point as he challenges the status quo.
While these are initial thoughts, ti does not end here. If you want to read on, you can read it here:
Titled: Silver Bullets and Factpinions – Hubspot vs. Margie Layman
http://www.michaelhartzell.com/Blog/bid/82822/Silver-Bullets-and-Factpinions-Hubspot-vs-Margie-Layman
I commend you Margie for “going for it”. While your approach is not one I would take, it is refreshing to have someone not play it safe and put themselves on the line with interesting points. Thank you.
Silver Bullets and Factpinions.
If someone asked me to share their story as a case study, I would do the same just as Hubspot did. Put the numbers on the table and allow others to evaluate and find the gems that apply to their business.
It is tough to compare the Superbowl TV Ad vs.a blog. These are apples and oranges since each have a different purpose and the call to action would most likely be different. The measures of success for either marketing campaign will be overlapping but with one audience “searching” and the other watching as a stranger, there is no comparison.
In either case, there is no silver bullet. Creating a synergy between several marketing methods increases the results for each. One stand alone marketing tactic will not have theh strength of several working in tandem.
Factpinions:
From a reader’s perspective, the blog is not typically fact. In most cases, the blog is filled with factpinions. Factpinions are when the facts are blended with opinions to make a point. If readers can read the blog as factpinions and remember to “trust but verify” in all things, Andrew Pitre makes his point. Don’t make assumptions and look twice before you leap.
Andrew does it an a more a aggressive manner than you will typically see from the Hubspot team. He does generalize the results and the conclusions assume you know are following his thought process. A lawyer would certainly tear the conclusions apart by asking about how the data was broken down.
…. but Andrew makes his point as he challenges the status quo.
While these are initial thoughts, ti does not end here. If you want to read on, you can read it here:
Titled: Silver Bullets and Factpinions – Hubspot vs. Margie Clayman
http://www.michaelhartzell.com/Blog/bid/82822/Silv…
I commend you Margie for “going for it”. While your approach is not one I would take, it is refreshing to have someone not play it safe and put themselves on the line with interesting points. Thank you.
PS… I was in Akron so many years ago before we came west. 🙂
@michaelhartzell Hi there,
I’m glad this spurred you on to do so much of your own thinking! Thank you for that!
I would clarify though, I am not trying to ridicule the post. Rather, I am trying to point out that the article was handled irresponsibly. This is no laughing matter, and whether or not it’s a way to sell products or not, misleading people when you are from a well-known, well-respected source is irresponsible. This happens all across the social media world, and it just so happened that this example was one I chose to write about because it was so blatantly and surprisingly (to me) off the mark.
I am not in the business of calling people out or being otherwise malicious, but in this case, I fear that people who may not be well versed in marketing will take the post’s words to heart, and that is very disconcerting.
Make sense?
Margie (and others in the comments) –
Thanks for the feedback, the commentary and the alternative opinions and ideas. The great part about the web today is that it enables discussion like this and allows people to form their own opinions. Reading through your article and all the comments from other folks, there were two themes I wanted to comment on.
1) Article “Exaggeration” – We do have a point of view (just like a journalist who writes for the NYT has a point of view) and readers of any publication should be aware that the authors have a point of view. By leaving comments open on our blog and participating in social media, we open ourselves up to criticism and questions, and I think we are pretty transparent and open. We have read all the feedback for this article and are thinking about what it means for us going forward. I think the article could have been written in a different way to clarify the facts vs the opinions and maybe let people come to more of their own conclusions to make the article both more effective and less controversial. I personally happen to agree with most of the conclusions and opinions in the article, but like all humans I have a point of view on the topic. 🙂
2) “Pitching” in the Article – Blogging by a company is a fine balance of providing helpful, useful information that attracts the people you want to attract, and using that blog to grow your company. HubSpot is a for-profit commercial enterprise, and I make no apologies for that. If we did not sell software, none of our blog articles, webinars, free tools, free education and certification would exist, and I think that would be a significant loss for the marketing community. I believe that free enterprise and companies seeing profit actually results in more innovation, more content and more value for the community. I disagree with people who say “you should never mention your product or service in a blog article”. On the one hand, if you always talk 100% about your products, you will likely get very few people reading your blog. On the other hand, if you talk about your products 0% of the time, you will likely get very few people knowing what it is that you do and buying your product or service. The key is to strike a balance. Clearly there are at least 2 or 3 people who felt like we did not strike the right balance in this article, and we are thinking about what that feedback means going forward for our content. But I can tell you that we will never go to having 0% of the content or links on our blog promote something – just as blogs like Mashable and Marketing Pilgrim have sponsored stories and advertising, and even places like Marketing Profs that have paid memberships also have advertising and content from companies.
Thanks for the feedback and conversation. We are listening, and do value the input!
– Mike Volpe, CMO @ HubSpot
PS – You mentioned our pricing was not listed on the product page. We do have a full page that lists all of our pricing at http://www.hubspot.com/pricing/ and this page is one of the links in our main navigation. Just click on “Pricing” in the main navigation at the top of the page.
Thank you for coming by and offering your measured response. I appreciate it!
I of course would expect that as a company trying to make money, you’d mention your products in blog posts with a gentle touch. I guess what rubbed me the wrong way in this particular post is that the link to your products was nested in information that I thought was perhaps misleading or even inaccurate. If you are going to promote a product and show its value, I think your case for it needs to be 100% fault-proof and rock solid, and I don’t really feel that this particular post hit the mark in those regards.
I’ll be interested to see how you follow up on this conversation, and thanks again very much for stopping in!
[…] when highly respected SEO and inbound marketing company HubSpot published a report indicating that blogging out-performed television ads during the Super Bowl. I had a lot to say about that report, and to his credit, Mike Volpe of […]